P R A C T I C A L I D E A S A N D U S E F U L T O O L S D 7 . 1

Editors

Per Kristensson

MIchael Willoughby

Inga Narbutaite

Jose Millet

Magnus Lindh

Lourdes Canos

Viktoriia Panova

Cristina Santandreu

April 2018

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

W H A T I S C O - C R E A T I O N ?

T H E R O A D T O C O - C R E A T I O N

T H E C O N T E X T O F C O - C R E A T I O N

T H E C O R E C O N C E P T S  

F A C I L I T A T O R S

B A R R I E R S

T O O L S F O R C O - C R E A T I O N

T H E M A P A S I T S T A N D S

The content of this document reflects the authors’ views and the Managing Agency cannot be held responsible for any use that may be made of the information it contains.

The various previous definitions of co-creation can be found in WP2.2 , but for the purposes of this

approximation to a roadmap, we will focus on the role of the citizen or service user and broadly adopt

the following definition:

Co-creation in CoSIE is a collaborative activity that aims to enrich and enhance the value in public service offerings. Co- created activities occur at any stage in the development of new service and during its implementation (value-in-service-

usage). It is manifested in a constructive exchange of different kinds of resources (ideas, competences, lived experience, etc.) that enhance the experienced value of public service. Individual and public value may be understood in terms of increased

wellbeing, shared visions for the common good, policies, strategies, regulatory frameworks or new services.

This first defintion will be revised and developed in a white paper currently being facilitated by 

members of the CoSIE innovation board with the help of feedback from our pilot programmes. 

A roadmap for co-creation is dependent on many agents and factors  and is specifically moulded by

each context. It is not a path set in stone, but evolves alongside the context in which it is applied.  In

order to have a shared understanding of co-creation, we propose five fundamental questions based on

elements that have emerged from the discussions and research carried out to this point. 

These questions concern: context, core concepts to consider, facilitators of co-creation, barriers to

co-creation and tools for overcoming some of those barriers. 

What sector(s) are you undertaking your co-creation pilot in and

how has co-creation previously been adopted in these?

(e.g. education, criminal justice system, healthcare etc.)

Where is your co-creation pilot set and how does this impact on

your project?

(e.g. geographic, political, cultural landscape etc.)

What are the desired outcomes of your co-creation project and

what resources do you have to achieve them?

(e.g. funding, capacities of people involved, type of change desired

- individual, behavioural, neighbourhood, organisational,

ideological, systemic etc.)

Who are the people and demographics you need to involve in the

co-creation project? How will they be affected by it and how can

they impact it (positively and/or negatively)?

(e.g. service users, front-line staff, management and strategic

management, policy makers, local and national press, etc.) (see

WP3)

Dialogue

Co-production

Personalisation

Participation

Citizen

activation

Citizen

influence

Engagement

Co-initiation

Public

deliberation

User

involvement

Co-design

Co-

implementation

The concepts that appear below are key words taken from examples of collaborative service creation in

all participating CoSIE countries (see WP2.2).

Stakeholders form a part of the movement that spurs the creation

of a new public service from the very start of the process. 

Example project: Finland, Programme 1. Service design with risk groups of social and health care 

Stakeholders jointly come up with ideas for the various parts of a

public service, how it will be delivered and whom it needs to reach.

Example project: Italy, Programme 2. Futura Trento. Il bello ci salverà.

Stakeholders are not only recipients of a service, but actively

participate in putting it into practice throughout the lifetime of

the scheme. 

Example project: Finland, Programme 4. Citizen-driven development in local service reform: May I help you?

Stakeholders collaboratively produce materials and share

perspectives in a way that public services undergo a continuous

evolution and improvement. 

Example project: UK, Programme 2. Community-led support (CLS)

All example projects can be found on the individual national reports for WP2.1

The user is at the core of the co-creation process.

 'Nothing designed for me without me.'

Example project: Hungary, Programme 1. Smart City Debrecen

Simply for users and other stakeholders to be present during the

co-creation process is insufficient, methods need to ensure that

each voice is fully heard

Example project: Netherlands, Programme 1. Co creation in monitoring and evaluation of local social services

Co-creation processes must be facilitated in a way that they

encourage citizens to be an active part of public service provision. 

Example project: Poland, Programme 1. Civic budget in Wrocław as an example of co-creation of public services at urban level

The experience of users and a variety of experts is vital to the

production, design and implementation of public services. 

Example project: Estonia, Estonian Union Child Welfare Youth Council 

Public services need to be tailored to meet people's individual

needs. A one-size-fits-all perspective can no longer be deemed

sufficient.  

Example project: UK, Programme 1. Individual Budgets Pilot Programme

The spaces used to facilitiate co-creation processes must

encourage communication and dialogue between stakeholders.

Trust and comfort are essential, especially for vulnerable groups.

Example project: Sweden, Programme 2. The Participatory Model in Social Services

The process needs to be facilitated and presented in a way that

stakeholders can relate to the topic being addressed and make it

their own. 

Example project: Spain, Programme 3. Co-creation of personal assistance services (SAP) in the Madrid region

It should be stressed that this is a transparent process made by

the public for the public, with no hidden agenda. 

Example project: Greece, Programme 3: SynAthina, Municipality of Athens

So what needs to happen in order to facilitate the co-creation process? The workshops, conversations, and individual

country studies came up with the following ingredients. Each process of co-creation will be different but here are

some positive elements you might want to consider ticking off in your design and implementation.

1. All participants should feel able to express themselves freely

2. Local people value conversations with a variety of agents on matters they feel are socially       

important

3. Participation with vulnerable groups is often higher (IMPORTANT: see barriers on next           

page)

4. Co-creative action strengthens relations between the public, private and third sectors

5. A fully integrative co-creative process keeps all stakeholders on the map and makes them      feel

part of a genuine effort for positive change

6. The support of public servants is vital in co-creative public service processes, they need to

understand their role as facilitators, be well-informed and well-trained

7. There needs to be an open, frequent and informed consideration of best practices

Experiences of co-creation among our partners and other attempts at collaborative service creation around Europe

have come across some important barriers that merit consideration from the initial design stage. Not all of these may

be specific to your case, but they are worth bearing in mind as they may crop up along your path to service creation. 

not enough user or

expert- intensive

involvement

difficulty involving

harder-to-reach groups

(reports show both positive

and negative results)

organisations are using

co-creation to meet their

own agendas and needs

users find it hard to

bridge the digital gap

difficulty in measuring

effectiveness

(effects are often long-term)

imbalance of power

in stakeholder meetings

(top-down control)

lack of resources for

implementation

lack of trust in/suspicion

of the public sector

lack of sufficient information

provided to stakeholders/

users

political environment 

not ready

public servants are not

well-informed of

an ethical facilitative

use of co-creation methods

lack of feedback to

improve the process

In order to enable the introduction of facilitators and overcome some of the barriers previously identifed, 

CoSIE proposes the use of certain tools. Where and how partners use these tools is up to the service co-

designers and implementers but their integration should be part of a carefully pre-planned process. 

Community Reporting allows people to tell authentic stories about  lived

experience offering vital insights into their lives. Through creating

spaces where people can describe their own realities, Community

Reporting enables people to:

1. Find their voice

2. Challenge perceptions

3. Be part of a conversation of change

The Living Lab at UNEW generates diagrammatic representations and

creates material through discussions which take place around them. It

enables the co-creation process through

1. Conversational models which map  roles and responsibilities

2. Process oriented models representing processes, buffers and flows.

3.The physical distribution of processes over real geographies and facilities

CoSIE collects, stores and analyzes ICT-based  and open data, from the project

pilots and from wider society to facilitate co-creation in service design.

CoSIE curates and moderates data into relevant channels and converts them

into usable forms according to the specific needs of  pilot schemes.

Rather than a map we've used a snake to represent the road we would like you to consider when you come to create

your pilots. Our snake poses a number of questions that, with your help, we will look to solve and add to over the coming

months to create a truly useful tool for co-creation in public services across Europe. 

What's my context?

What core concepts

do i want to

consider? 

What facilitators do I

have/can i provoke?

What barriers

am I facing?

What tools can I use

for facilitation?

1

2

3

5

4

The content of this document reflects the authors’ views and the Managing Agency cannot be held responsible for any use that may be made of the information it contains.